mtm78

Ideally not ofc, having a working class balance should work so that it balances itself. But seeing how WG is failing to provide this, MM restrictions are more and more looking as their only way out. That or renaming it back to World off Battleships.

I only played those during testing ( not pts ) but I seen how a great player can utilize them ( Flamu for instance ). I won't be able to fully duplicate it but I am really looking forward for my Donskoi ( I don't think I will reach CE on my captain though before that so I won't be as effective anyway ).

Chat banned again, not even notification of being reported though... nice system WG Guess even pinging the map to a coward North Carolina running away through the middle channel in Two Brothers domination is a ' serious offense '. Ow and saying: ' OMG it's weekend clearly ' when half of team turns around mid fight. -> obviously chat ban material. Seriously retarded system. So I guess the above is also being an a$$hat

The counter to CV's is teamwork, in CBT the first thing a CA would ask would be ' which BB needs an escort ' and vice verse. You never see this in randoms now, mostly though because there are not that many CV's playing and when they are in the match you can't ask as there are often more BB's then CA's around. WG has been trying to balance them around 1v1's, with giving BB's more and more AAA on their own, which isn't the way to go imo but I guess it had to be done to retain the influx of new players who don't want to think about teamwork or playing their class in conjunction with other classes.

Look at his wake, he wasn't even trying to evade the planes but keeps sailing in a straight line Not that it would help much against that strike setup on his own, but sadly this is the kind of person who would then come to forum and complain about CV's without ever considering he played a really big part in why he got killed like that ( being alone, not evading ).

Just. guys, WG has already used arming distance as a balancing aid so it's not like it's completely impossible for them to do so. If it's needed, I wouldn't know tbh I guess it takes someone who plays all classes to really make a judgement on that. Or someone who has access to all the statistics WG has, like dmg done by air launched torpedoes against each ship. Full strike Haku -> Maybe WG should give back full strike loadout to IJN so the lone sailing BB would see this happen to them more often Don't use economy when everyone knows it's broken for CV's at the moment, you were doing so well with just telling people to play them and try to get those incredible high damage numbers. I tried, I failed, I am not good at setting up manual drops. I stopped playing them after ARP plane kill missions because I lost a game where all I had to do was drop a BB who was sailing in a straight line and I dropped my torpedoes on an island I won't play a class where I am a detriment to my team ( wish more people would feel this way though ).

Like it was the advanced hydro which allowed Bismarck to play like that

Ow I agree, and new players will not like my premium DD's which will run around tier 5 and 7 with my 19 point captains ( IJN and VMF ). Especially my Gremmy with this skill meeting tier 5 players who are grinding new captains/lines, kamikaze R the same. Tier 7 will be already fairer but still, don't see how new players would compete against high skill point captains. Someone proposed not to long ago to prevent this seal clubbing by making captain perks only active depending on the tiers, like if I put my high point captain in my Tachibana I would only have the first rows of perks working and not the 3th / 4th row. Might be something to look at, but then again there are also players which play thousands of games in low tier silver ships so they will also have a high skill point captain.

This would lower their avg damage output incrementally since CV's have to deal with distance / flight time with each strike. But it might be something they could test on a PT, with small steps. As a DD player I would like this a lot. I will admit I <3 CV's who keep spotting around smoke to give early warning for torpedo's fired from it as well as being able to strike the DD when the smoke runs out.

They can still spot you and your torpedoes, but yes a good CV player will have much higher situational awareness and will know when to use allied ships to avoid to much CV attention. But in late game, IJN DD's are not that hard to cross drop by an equally competent CV player. I think you would have no issues cross dropping me in the IJN DD's, and I'm by most accounts not a bad DD player. USN DD's ( not all ofc ) are more agile / turn better, and have access to AAA consumable to avoid to much CV attention. VMF DD's usually play at longer ranges where it's easier to run for allies to use their AAA umbrella. Idk yet about Germans, I assume they are very easy to kill for a competent CV due to their huge turning circles. So my comment was supporting you, as it's the baddies which keep claiming CV's are ' broken ', yet this whole discussion went sideways because you were still thinking about an unpleasant former encounter? Mods remove more posts of mine which they shouldn't. I also rarely if ever post in CV forum.. Sorry I can't recall any of this nor is it in any way related to this topic

How does that relate with your remark about my comment? ps: Also I don't think I flamed you, I guess you felt like that for some reason but that was never the intend. And yes my memory is such that I don't even remember disagreeing with you on any CV related subject, but either way how would that be related to this topic?

Can you elaborate on which part of my comment is related to my admittedly severely lacking experience of playing CV's myself? edit: just pointing out btw; I am not for nerving CV's and I know CV economy is bullocks now, my comment when I quoted you was a jab at the baddies complaining about single CV's... Bots in PvP

High tier VMF cruisers ( Chappy / Donskoi / Moskva ) are excellent barbeque material as well. Even Shchors is a decent BB burner.

Manual checks for the reports would be impossible anyway, but chat abuse reports shouldn't stack if they are never checked by a person. Remove the stacking and the incremental nature of the reports weight and only hand out automated chat bans if majority of team reports someone in one match? says 7 people from a single match reporting you -> chat ban. But any less and they should just get dismissed.

But bad players deserve to have fun to.... Which is why tier 8 - 10 already has no more dual CV's per game. They should extend that downwards all the way imo, this way a bad CV can't be matched with another bad cv against a good cv with another good cv. One good CV is not as game breaking vs a terrible one, as two are against two of those 45'ers.

Which 'problem'? The static gameplay imposed by the BB heavy meta? If so, you' re simply wrong. Island side scraping? No it isn't. Overly prolific BB's being the cause of static gameplay, then yes it is the problem I make it out to be. Caused by the BB's which refuse to tank for their team, off course cruisers don't push up when the BB's are not there to take most of the focus, that's the role of a tank in any mmo. BB's seem to get played by more and more people who think they are not tanks but ranged damage dealers. That's and the overly abundant BB's at some tiers ( especially around tier 8 if the latest figures / server stats were correct ). 'young guys'? Age has nothing to do with it, there are plenty of older people then me who can and do play this game at a higher level then I do for instance. Teamwork is a mentality problem of people coming into the game and not understanding their roles / not putting in any effort in learning them. Correct, I was told the same yesterday because I was mad about stupid team members, top tier BB division refusing to do their job, ending the match almost on full hp having done absolutely nothing to actually help win the game. One of my division members told me I should never expect anything from anyone on my team and just be happy if they do something useful, but should that really be the expectating we should have when pressing battle? Having to play 1 vs 23? I rather WG finally add some proper tutorials into the game, and finally start aggressively punishing bad play and rewarding good play by making economy resolve around playing classes in their roles ( in some way.. wouldn't be easy as not all ships in a class are equal... might even be impossible ). I guess you' re not talking about Realistic mode. And yeah people care about what their team does because this is a TEAM GAME where they all have roles to play. The whole is larger then the sum of it's parts but that is only true when each part does it's intended role. And I don't expect everyone to be a superunicum player, but I would like people to at least pay attention to a minimap

__Danger___, on 15 January 2017 - 11:18 AM, said: while this is probably it's biggest boost to survivability So you' re saying it's a must pick skill also for torpedo destroyers as that is the only way the perk addition could 'boost' their survivability? ( I think it is a must pick but just making sure ). If it's a must pick, it doesn't give any more options? If it is a must pick for both torpedo and torpedo hunters, torpedo hunters might sustain their survivability to an extend but that's only because they will spend the time running away from knife fights with the relentlessly hunting USN DD's which will also have the skill. Or, since you point out missing out on other beneficial builds, 3 man skilled player divisions where only one has to have the perk and the other two can be specced however they want ( not that 3 DD divisions are that good a pick for carrying ).

The biggest problems for cruisers imo is not a lack of consumables, it's the abundance of BB's in certain games forcing static gameplay. Cruisers who use the tools they have already can perfectly go after DD's, it's the BB's deleting them if they move up to support their own DD's which are the problem. Or well, BB's are supposed to do that and it's ok that they do, cruisers are also agile enough to not get deleted by a single BB if they can time their turns right, but with multiple BB's aiming for you it only takes one with a brain who waits until you're forced into a turn by another BB and then sending some lovely AP to your citadel. But yes, please for the love of god WG, listen to community and do not put RDF into the game. edit: btw WG said it's not just to help cruisers but also gunboat DD's... like USN needed more tools to perform better ( judging by server stats, that is really laughable ).

is the epitome of static gameplay people seem to complain about. Killing 'sidescraping' Izumo's / Iowa's / NCal's / Yamato's isn't really that easy unless there are other islands you can use to flank it, or if you're in a CV. No it could not and I just explained why. Lowering range on BB would mean lowering range on cruisers as well or the BB's would get kited without them being able to do anything about it. My Hindenburg has 20km range for instance, Moskva is a range beast as well and Zao will invisifire BB's to death. Now if you said to lower the range of BB's and then all the other ships as well ( with the exception of DD's ) and then readjust concealment to factor in the lower ranges, maybe it would be worth a try

Bis is well know for being best performing tier 8 BB so I guess people are indeed just grinding for her

It doesn't work like that. Some cruisers are already close to BB range, if you nerf BB range you have to nerf them to or you will get indefinite kiting. No testing is needed to realize that. Also, no one is forcing you to stay at max range now as well, that's why CE on a BB is a good choice, it allows you to close the distance more. The problem now with the long range meta is that the entire 'teamwork' setup has gone down the drain because there are to many BB's per game meaning cruisers can't move up to support the DD's. That's the problem which is causing the static gameplay, to many battleships. In games with a normal number of BB's the gameplay is much more fluid and aggressive, both for the other classes ( cruisers mostly ) but also for the battleships themselves if they play it right.

Shiratsuyu: 12Mahan: 7Leningrad: 24Blyskawica: 34 + 1 = 35 she is simply the best firehose DD Myoko: 6 - 3 = 3 Sorry Trainspite I seriously do not like Myoko ( and I tend to do alright in cruisers so there )Flint: 23Fiji: 20Belfast: 35Scharnhorst: 45Hiryu (2/2/2): 20Saipan (Torpedo Bombers): 11

It is the core concept which is utterly disgustingly broken, as it removes tactical depth in favor of brawling. But yeah, let's call 90% of players saying NO to the skill 'whiners' Ow wait...

If BB's don't have more range then CA's then CA's will kite them to death due to speed difference. Cruisers are worthwhile to play, it's just very static with that many battleships per game as you can not play aggressive at all but you need to say at range. edit: limit BB's to 3 per team, DD's to 3, rest cruisers with one or two CV's ( preferably one like how it is now on tier 8 - 10 ). That would be really nice gameplay for all classes as long as they got a brain and play as a team.

It's 9.5 but it's the thought that counts...